M N BARIA Vs. BULSAR DIST PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri B.Y. Mankad, learned counsel for the petitioners. None for the respondent no.1 though name of Shri H.R. Lathigara appears. None for the respondents no. 2 and 3 despite service. Shri A.Y. Kogje, learned AGP, when was called upon to answer the petition, made a submission that the State is not a party.

(2.) Short facts necessary for disposal of the present writ application are that the petitioner-Bilimora Parsi Zorastrian Anjuman Trust Fund who was possessing two parcels of land, made applications to the Taluka Development Officer for conversion of the user from agricultural to non-agricultural. The said applications were allowed by the Taluka Development Officer on 13.8.77 [Annexure:A] and by another order dated 16.8.77 [Annexure:B]. Each of the order contained condition no. 4 that if within a period of six months from the date of the permission, constructions are not raised, then the present petitioner would be liable to pay penal amount to the concerned authority. Before the petitioner could open the construction, one Balubhai Anant Vishnu Dandekar challenged the said orders before the District Development Officer, who by his order dated 31.12.77 stayed the effect and operation of the said two permissions. The result of the said order was that the petitioner could not raise any construction and the permissions granted on 13.8.77 and 16.8.77 in view of the order of the stay were kept in suspended animation.

(3.) On 9.2.81, the petitioner submitted to the Talati-cum-Mantri that in view of the stay granted by the District Development Officer, they cannot be asked to pay the additional amount nor fine can be imposed against them. The Taluka Development Officer, vide his letter dated 29.7.87 informed the petitioner Trust that in view of the stay order dated 31.12.77, the penalty/fine amount would not be recovered.